Appendix III :
Two contrasting testimonies.

The following is the testimony of an ex-gay Catholic
with a commentary by "Joey" a lesbian Catholic
friend of mine. My own sparse additions are in brown.

In my own case, I believe significant relationship
problems with both of my parents, as well as with my peers, contributed
to the development of same-sex attractions in my life and personality.
I don't blame my parents at all; they became the people they were because
of the upbringing they had and they tried to do the best they could rearing
me. But my father was very emotionally distant throughout my childhood,
while my mother was likely too emotionally available.

I can identify a similar pattern in my
life, but I'm not a gay man. And I've never found much agreement on what
"causes" lesbianism.

In addition, my parent's marriage was strained in
many ways and that cannot help but have been felt by a child. If pressed
on the matter I guess I would say it was possible that I might have had
a sort of personality that might have been vulnerable to the development
of same-sex attractions. But at the bottom line I think certain relationship
and environmental factors needed to be in place for it to flourish.

I'm not sure what he means by this. What
are these "certain" factors? Also, I have many straight friends whose parents'
relationships were strained (and are strained) and they don't "struggle"
with same sex attraction.I want to know what "sort
of personality" is "vulnerable
to the development of same-sex attractions" other
than the personality of a gay man or lesbian woman? Apart from the prejudicial
use of "vulnerable",
does this do anything other than define what one means by these terms?

I was born in 1963 and probably the key time for
culture to have a big influence on me was in the period from 1976to 1986. It was around 1976 that I became sexually
aware: I began to have sexual desires and began acting out sexually,
initially with myself though masturbation but also with other, older, boys
whose bodies, experience and authority I tended to idolize. Looking back
on it I can say that they, to some extent, took advantage of having a younger
boy around with whom they could satisfy some fundamental lusts.

How horrible for Mr. Morrison. This doesn't
sound like it was too pleasurable for him, but more like a species of sexual
abuse: "took advantage of", "fundamental lusts".
Although some of my female friends and I flirted as children, this was
not my experience then nor is it my experience now. As I have aged, I have
also not experienced sexual feelings as compulsions. However, this change
has not made me straight nor has it convinced me to live a sexless life
(though I currently do live one). This learning how to channel and control
my passions has lead me to want to seek a relationship with another woman
based on friendship and mutual interest.
Sex isn't high on this list, though I would not be opposed to having it
either. In other words, I do not generally experience my sexuality as "lust"
these days.

I don't recall too many explicit "fag" jokes. As
the homosexual liberation or gay movement drew more attention nation-wide
Iremember there being jokes about that and about
AIDS. But I was always able to hide my same-sex attractions, and the older
boys with whom I sometimes acted out sexually did not seem to associate
my willingness to have some forms of sex with them with definitive homosexuality
on my part.

I wonder if he's reached his current
conclusion about the immorality of "same-sex attraction" because of these
generally negative sexual experiences. Loveless sexual encounters do not,
in general, lead to a healthy sense of self, in my opinion.

Probably the biggest cultural influence on my same-sex
attractions came when I was around nineteen or so and it was more or less
inevitable that, if you lived with any same-sex attractions, you would
have sex and define yourself as gay. The only alternative the culture provided
- simply not telling anyone that you lived with same-sex attractions -
was unacceptable since that was a ticket to a truly miserable and fearful
life.

Since I wasn't around for the seventies,
I can't comment on this. But at least today, I know several young men and
women my age and younger who identify as gay/lesbian/bisexual and who have
never had sex. I came out when I was nineteen, and I didn't immediately
jump into bed with a woman. I've never felt overwhelming pressure to do
so either.

In retrospect I would have appreciated a cultural
alternative to the extremes of either walking around afraid of anyone finding
out that I lived with same-sex attractions or defining myself as gay and
hitting the party scene.

It seems to me that this fellow's response
to "same sex attraction"
stems from a lot of emotional suffering, not from dissatisfaction caused
by being gay per se.

I am not sure I have discovered a way to "counteract"
same-sex attractions. Indeed. I suspect most folks haven't. Rather, I think
I discovered some of the same things that anyone who moves from a life
defined by a temporal desire toone defined by seeking Christ also discovers.

Again, he seems to define an orientation
with "temporal desire", and an orientation with "hitting the party scene".
Promiscuity and sexual orientation are not necessarily linked.This testimony is directly relevant to the discussion
of justification given above.

The degrees of temptations we face often fade when
we stop indulging them; seeking chastity and reigning in one's passions
weakens them and, in the case of same-sex attractions, I believe living
chastely helped diminish the degree of same-sex attractions that I experienced.

Living chastely has also diminished my
"attractions". However, it has not diminished my need to love another woman
and give myself entirely to her: financially, emotionally, etc. My love
for my current interest, for example, is based far more on shared interest
and friendship than sexual attraction. What
about emotional attraction: the attraction that occurs between two people
who are entirely on the same wave-length that they might well be the same
person? Love is not just about sex, but love doesn't have to exclude
sex, either. Provided one behaves responsibly with sex.I'm beginning to believe that many gay folks
who try and "control" that part of themselves to this degree are not suffering
from any kind of "condition" or illness. Rather, I think they simply have
not learned how to love themselves, or to let Christ fully love them. Further,
they, like many straight folks, have confused sex with love, and also "sexual
orientation" with "personal identity".When one fully loves oneself, in my opinion,
one does not dishonour one's body or mind by seeking out random and frequent
sexual encounters, nor does one deny one's sexuality. I took the latter
route for years, and I suffered just as much as Mr. Morrison seems to have
suffered. When we fully love ourselves, we seek our highest good - we seek
relationships based on love, not on sex. Relationships in which sex do
not have to play a great role, or even a role at all, to flourish.It seems to me that Mr. Morrison has problems
that are in no way connected (or only peripherally connected) to his sexuality.

For the record, I believe men and women can diminish
same-sex attractions over time and to varying degrees. In my own life that
has been my experience, even though I have never sought therapy to diminish
those same-sex attractions.

I don't think it would do anything but
destroy him if he did so. He is very wise to avoid such things.

Even though I still live with a degree of same-sex
attractions, that degree is less now than it was three years ago and I
expect I will experience it even less strongly three years from now.

Again, sexuality is defined simply as
whom
one is attracted to not whom one is. So limiting. It is much
more than this. My sexuality is not simply about aesthetics. It is not
only an attraction to female bodies, a definite stirring that males often
cannot create in me, a preference for the company of women, and so on.
My sexuality is about my relationship to the world and to everyone in the
world.People often say this, and often do not define
sexuality in clear terms when speaking so broadly. So, I will do so now.
My sexuality is about relating to others, about using the insights my attractions,
preferences, vulnerabilities and personality interact with other people,
male and female. For example, I am not usually attracted to males. Therefore,
most of my friendships with men, straight and gay, lack sexual tension
and the things that spring from such tension. They are very relaxed, deep,
and most men say I am easy to talk to. Men of all orientations really open
up to me when they admit they rarely do this with other women. Could they
do this if I was straight? Possibly, but I don't think so. Not because
straight women can't relate to men in this way (I'm sure many can and do),
but I have lived thinking I was a straight woman. And when I was being
dishonest with myself, my relationships with men were strained, uncomfortable.
Clearly, to me and in my case, being honest with myself about my sexuality
influenced non sexual situations.

I haven't sought therapy to diminish the same-sex
attractions I experience because such therapy is expensive in money, time
and emotional energy

To me, that sounds like code for "it's
horrendously frightening, painful and humiliating, and I want no part of
it!" good for him!

and, given my background, I have had bigger obstacles
to overcome in therapy than same-sex attractions.

This is the sentence that really made
me sit forward and say "ahah!". I think Mr. Morrison has some emotional/psychological
issues to work through (probably from what seems to me like a traumatic
and sexually degrading childhood and youth). His definition of sex and
sexuality, for example, strike me as uncomfortably similar. These were
the definitions I held, more or less, when I was 'in the closet' to myself
-- and when I was only recently 'out' to myself (at ages nineteen and twenty).
Sex was something ugly and lustful, and had nothing to do with a person's
deepest self.I sense a kinship with this man. And I really,
really hope he is in therapy. It sounds like he's a very hurt man. I'm
not saying this to judge him, either.

I never really decided to try to change my sexual
desires.

He keeps saying this. Nothing about Mr.
Morrison's orientation has "changed". At no point does he say "I'm straight
now". He simply says his "same sex attractions" have been "diminished".Despite what some Courage priests say, this Magisterium
hasn't to the best of my knowledge taught that homosexuals can "change"
their orientation.

I did convert to a belief in Jesus Christ and to
seeking him, first to Anglicanism and, later, to Roman Catholicism. I came
to Christ because, like the blind man on the roadside, I was in despair
and had nothing to lose. No one evangelized me or offered to bring to me
to Church.

This is touching. I trust that Our Lord
will help him through these emotional problems.

By roughly age thirty I had achieved a lot of what
contemporary gay culture said a man could achieve. I had a lover of seven
years. I had a good job and was respected by my peers at work. My partner
and I owned property together and enjoyed an active sex life. I was openly
gay in all quarters of my life. But nonetheless I remained unhappy. With
everything I had, life seemed and felt empty.

Look at this list. "Lover",
"job", "respect", "owning property", "active sex life".
Most tellingly, too, "contemporary gay culture".
I don't think any of these things bring ultimate happiness. I had a good
job at the University bookstore a few years ago. It was full time, paid
well, and I worked with interesting people. But the work was monotonous,
and I was often depressed on and off the job. Respect of one's peers is
important, but less so than mutual respect and friendship.
Owning property is good, but does not lead to ultimate happiness. I do
not own my apartment building or my Mother's house, but I am not unhappy
because of this. And sex does not equal happiness or love. So it seems
to me that both the "gay culture" and Mr. Morrison's view of what constituted
happiness were not necessarily good ends but things that were treated as
ends, not means.

I spent a couple of years trying to straddle the
line between obedience and sexual activity by calling myself a "gay Christian,"
someone who could believe in Christ and still have gay sex.

I find this offensive. I am not a "gay
Christian" because I disingenuously "believe in Christ" while sleeping
around! I am gay because, well, when I was eight years old I wanted to
cuddle with my best friend at a sleep-over, because I find something incredible
and beautiful and attractive in women that I do not find in men. Gay identity
and gay promiscuity are not the same things.

But as I came to pray more and learn more about Jesus
Christ, about historic Christianity and about the saints, and as I as saw
the witness other faithful Christians made about the role of Christ in
their lives, I came to the conclusion that I no longer wanted to be a "gay
Christian."

I would like him to talk more about what
he learned 'about Jesus,
historic Christianity and about the saints'.
I wonder, did he ever read St. Julian of Norwich, St.
Aelred of Riveaux, the passion of Sts.
Bacchus and Sergius? What saint ever wrote, 'Jesus took away my same-sex
attractions' or 'Jesus made me not gay anymore'? I do not doubt that Mr.
Morrison received inspiration and encouragement from his historical study
of Christianity, but as an outsider to his spiritual progress here, I question
what this vaguely described research had to do with his orientation.

I wanted to be Christ's, and if loving him meant
living chastely, and if he was willing to help me do so, then that is what
I wanted and what I want today.

And if loving him meant letting love
in and realizing that sex is not love ....?

I think John Paul has performed a service to Christians
and even some non-Christians by his careful explanations andannunciation of the theology of the body. I think
there is such confusion today about the role our bodies play in our spiritual
lives and the importance of our bodies as part of our creation. John Paul
II has laid a foundation for a very important part of the Church's message
for the next millennia.

Vague still. What confusion? What role?I think that Mr Morrison is wrong here, and that
John Paul II has done a deal of harm in this field.

The Church can do all single people a favour by encouraging
[all people], whether or not they live with same-sex attractions, todevelop deeper and stronger relationships and
friendships that don't involve sex.

I know of absolutely no single people
of any orientation who lack friendships and relationships "that
don't involve sex". I do not see how doing
otherwise could be physically or emotionally possible: even for a sex addict!Also, note the use of the word 'relationship'.
Often today 'relationship'
is used only to describe a romantic/sexual association between people.
However, 'relationship' more accurately describes any association between
two people. My mother and I have a relationship. My best friend and I have
a relationship. My co-workers at the theatre and I have a relationship,
etc.However, I assume that Mr. Morrison is getting
at the idea of living with a 'brother' or 'sister' if you're gay: meaning
living with someone as a roommate or friend and not engaging in sex. While
this may work for some folks, I do not believe it should be held up as
the standard. For one thing, this kind of reasoning seems to me to indicate
that gay folks are somehow diseased - incapable of forming anything but
hermetic, sterilized relationships. It seems to me to almost suggest: "form
friendships, but always be on your guard. You could fall at any second!".

So many people today, and not just the young, are
confused about what genuine friendship is
and how important it is to have emotional intimacy in our lives. The Church
instructs single men and women to live chastely, but she does not instruct
us to live in isolation.

It is refreshing to see that Mr. Morrison
understands this. I now wish he could just make the next logical conclusion.

The Church needs to help educate people that emotionally
and intimately satisfying lives can be had without sexual activity.

Of course, but they can also be had with
sexual activity: when such activity is responsible, life-giving, loving,
and - did I mention responsible?This is pretty much exactly the opposite of what
in practice the Church teaches.

[It is wrong to] think that your same-sex attractions
must, per se, define your life. The human person is too magnificently complex
to be boiled down to the label "I am a gay man" or "I am a lesbian."

I fully agree. However, it seems that
Mr. Morrison has done just that.

Particularly if you are young and have not acted
out sexually, don't believe that you will necessarily experience the same
degree of same-sex attractions that you do today.

Of course not. Our sexuality grows and
matures as we do. I am not the same sex crazed person at twenty-three that
I was at eighteen. I now realize there is more to life than sex.

Don't imagine that because you live with same-sex
attractions God must not love you or that you can't seek him or that you
cannot seek to become a saint.

Why should gay people seek to become
saints anymore than your average heterosexual person should? Although,
in my opinion, this current magisterium has gone embarrassingly trigger-happy
when it comes to canonization (thus cheapening the title of "saint" and
the Magisterium's credibility), sainthood is a rare thing reserved for
exemplary individuals. I know I am no Hildegard of Bingen, nor ever could
aspire to be one! Are gay people somehow more saint like than straights?
Is sainthood somehow equal to chastity and celibacy? I'd like to think
that the sex lives of saints take a back seat to their works of mercy,
charity and witness to the Gospels.In an authentic sense, all Catholics are called
to be saints. This is the core of the Traditional Catholic doctrine of
Justification.

The origins of homosexuality

You've mentioned that familial or parental situations
may contribute to same-sex attractions. Is there a difference betweenchildren in these situations and youths who choose
to experiment with homosexuality because of social influences?

There's a significant difference between
a child with same-sex attractions due to family environments rather than
due to experimentation.

Note that only two explanations for "same-sex
attractions" are here envisaged. The ignorance evinced in the question
and answer is staggering.

The difference is the youth choosing to experiment
is comparatively rare, even though it seems to become "cool" at a high
school and college level. Generally speaking, there's a high probability
that those who are experimenting already had same-sex attractions and are
expressing them in the college period.

Note that now the "experimentation" explanation
is now largely dismissed, implicitly.

It is not common for someone who thinks he or she
is heterosexual and who is from a healthy family to move into experimentation.
A trauma, such as a teen-age girl or boy being raped, may lead him or her
to have same-sex attractions rather than opposite sex attractions.

I wonder if there is any evidence of
this, it seems contrary to reason! In any case, it has nothing to do with
the experience of those who identify as gay and who have had no such traumatic
experience.

Sometimes there's a teen-age period when those who
don't feel attracted to the opposite sex try a relationship with the opposite
sex, and it doesn't work out. They also find out having sex with someone
of the opposite sex is not a cure for same-sex attractions.Some social influences that lead to youth engaging
in homosexual behaviour can be traced back to high school. Many felt alone
because they had same-sex attractions and weren't fitting in well in the
group. In college, they fell into a group of people with same-sex attractions,
looking to each other for companionship. At this point, experimentation
may happen among people who are already predisposed.

Predisposed by what, exactly?

The more we study, the more we see the influence
at home is early, in grade school, and even earlier.

From birth, or even conception, perhaps!

But it's important to remember that teen-agers who
think they have same-sex attractions aren't set for life. They say they're
'gay', but they may not be.

Just as not all those "teen-agers
who think they have" opposite sex "attractions
aren't set for life. They say they're" 'straight',
"but they may not be." On the other hand they
may just be gay!

When teens say they feel uncomfortable around peers
of the same sex and are attracted to them, often they've also had difficulty
relating to and identifying emotionally and psychologically with their
same-sex parent: it's just that the realization of this strained relationship
doesn't happen until much later.

When suggested by their Courage analyst,
for example!

It must be noted that same-sex attractions can also
be generated by the child's relationship with the parent of the opposite
sex.

Or by eating marshmallows, perhaps. Where
is the objective evidence to back up this assertion. In any case, why does
it matter? Perhaps opposite sex "attractions
can also be generated by the child's relationship with the parent of the
opposite sex." This whole discussion is predicated
that there is a fundamental asymmetry between "same-sex" and "opposite
sex" attractions.

In my years of counselling women with same-sex attractions,
I have met a number of women who believe that their same-sex attractions
were mainly due to their relationship with their father. Both parents have
a great influence on the child's sense of self worth and gender identity.
There can also be other traumatic experiences outside the family that contribute
toward the development of same-sex attractions.

Note that this is a report of the beliefs
reported by unhappy subjects, not scientific evidence.

Although most cases of same-sex attractions begin
in childhood, the teen-age period becomes critical: either the teen is
drawn toward acting out homosexuality, or the teen gets help and learns
to live a chaste lifestyle.

Note the huge underlying asymmetry implied
here.

The teen may also be able to gradually work toward
overcoming or at least minimizing homosexual attractions with the help
of a good therapist and spiritual director.

What should be done
about homosexuality?

What can be done for children who have stable home
lives but who are experimenting with homosexuality due to social influences?

If the parents know that their child
has experimented with homosexual acts, the child must be commanded to seek
therapy from reliable Catholic doctors.

!!!! "commanded"
!!!!

If it is a stable home life in the full sense, where
the child has a good relationship with both parents, then the parents simply
need to continue to develop a healthy home environment while being mindful
of external influence on the family, especially on the child.These 'external influences' may surface in adolescence
and early college years when young people are found in a scholastic environment
where it is considered 'cool' to be homosexual or bisexual. If the individual
already has some degree of same-sex attractions, he may slip into homosexual
acts and thus be seduced into a homosexual way of living.

I have no experience of any such scholastic
environment. All my experience as a Sixth Form
College tutor tells me that homophobia is still the norm within youth culture.
Fr Harvey is living in an Alternative Universe!

A healthy home environment presupposes that the children
are learning to relate well to both parents. If you don't see that, there
are some problems.Social influences and difficulties can occur
if a teen goes out with companions that don't agree with the teen's parents
and don't have Christian values. Parents need to talk to their children,
give their child thorough instruction on the purpose and meaning of human
sexuality, and the beauty of marriage as union of a man and a woman.It's seldom done. The writings of Christopher
West on Pope John Paul II's 'theology of the body' are most helpful.Parents are afraid to tell their youngsters what
to do, and at 18 teens have their freedom to do whatever they please. The
most pernicious teachers of young people are the media.

Amazing! Fr Harvey seems to think
that just being nice to your son while giving him suitable books to read
and keeping him away from the TV and Cinema will make sure that he 'straightens
out'! The presumption that homophobia is an example of 'Christian
values' is itself offensive.

What should be done
about the parents of homosexual children?

What aid can be given to parents who may not be willing
or able to examine whether their children are showing signs of same-sex
attraction?

The use of the word 'aid'
here is offensive. In effect, the questioner is asking how someone can
be helped to become homophobic when they don't want to be!

Often parents are afraid that their child
has same-sex attractions but do not want to seek professional help in order
to ascertain their child's inner tendencies.The problem is that parents are not given real
knowledge of signs of homosexual inclinations. Also, when someone from
the outside: a doctor; psychiatrist; priest; friend, tells parents that
their child may have same-sex attractions, the parents have a very hard
time with it. They do not want to believe it.

Or perhaps they don't want to condemn
their child in the way that they fear the Church will want them to!

Many parents won't listen, but someone on the adult
level needs to make those parents aware that their child is crying out:
they need to get help for their children and get educated themselves about
same-sex attractions. There are books that are helpful: for example, Don
Schmierer's book, "An Ounce of Prevention."

Perhaps their child is "crying
out" to be loved and affirmed and accepted
for what they are.

Parents are sometimes unreachable: there's a lot
of denial. The parents do not want to believe that their child has same-sex
attractions or that their child will lead a homosexual lifestyle if he
or she is not helped.Parents who have gotten beyond the propaganda
that a homosexual lifestyle is normal and acceptable think about how difficult
it will be for themselves and their child. They think that they can't look
forward to their child's marriage and grandchildren, and they are very
concerned about that.

Note that Fr Harvey identifies the possibility
that parents may believe that "a homosexual
lifestyle is normal and acceptable" as a major
problem. The idea that parents are more concerned about the prospect of
a wedding and grandchildren than the happiness of their own son or daughter
is very sad. After all a precious vocation to celibacy, like Fr Harvey's,
has the same consequences!

How to deal with parents who don't understand or
aren't willing to see the signs of same-sex attraction is a most difficult
question to answer, because it's very hard to know what to do. Over a few
months of talking to those parents, you'll figure out a way to help the
parents and the child.The signs of same-sex attractions are sometimes
very well covered. A big youth who is a football player can have same-sex
attractions. A little one who is not athletic may be heterosexual. There
are many problems interpreting the signs, but most often, it can be determined
by the relationship with parents, siblings and same-sex peers.

This all sounds rather like Orwell's
thought police, but perhaps one shouldn't be so surprised!

It is very hard, because often the child won't tell
you the truth, yet some will talk to a counsellor.

Any vulnerable person would be ill advised
to confide in Fr Harvey or anyone remotely like him!

Sometimes teens who are traumatized keep it inside
themselves.

If the choice is between that and confiding
in Fr Harvey, they are sensible to do so!

When they finally talk about it, no matter their
age, they still can be helped with any same-sex attractions.

Indeed, but not by Fr Harvey!

What goes wrong in marriage to
cause children to become homosexual?

What is the necessary healthy psychological environment
that parents need to build into their marriage and family in order toprevent or to help heal same-sex attractions
in children?

The question's arrogance in supposing
that 'same-sex attractions' are the result of an unhealthy psychological
environment is insulting to all happily married parents of well adjusted
gay children.

Parents working together with their children
produce a healthy psychological environment. In a home where parents and
children like to spend time together, both children who are heterosexual
or who have same-sex attractions will benefit from it.At the same time, the parents need to make it
clear that they need time together in order to sustain their marriage.
Youngsters need to see their father and mother embrace regularly. Often,
children with same-sex attractions come from a home where they don't see
their parents embrace.

And often they don't!

If a child comes from a home with no sign of affection
between parents or siblings, it's difficult for a child with same-sex attractions
to rightly order his affection and attractions.

Why? How? What does this mean?

You can't talk to your kids about homosexuality alone:
it needs a background. First, you have to talk to them about theology
and God's plan for the human person, then heterosexuality,
then homosexuality.

The best approach for single parents is to find someone
in the family to give the child some companionship and instruction, and
act as a role model. A single mother needs to find an uncle or someone
in the family to relate to her son, and vice versa with a single father
and his daughter. It's the parent's prerogative and privilege to do that
for his or her child.

The idea that friendship with a kind
uncle will stop little George from being interested in the genitalia of
his male school friends is amusing at best.

It's a long process to heal sexual identity. It doesn't
take place all at once. It can start at three or four years old: when kids
start showing signs of same-sex attraction, and can go through the teen-age
and adult years. It has to be put in a larger perspective.

That Fr Harvey asserts that same-sex
attraction starts at age three or four is amazing in its implications.

I find two factors helpful for teen-agers: professional
therapy with a good therapist who is faithful to the Church's teachings;
and spiritual direction and prayer.

How exactly does Fr Harvey find these
things helpful? What are his outcomes? On what basis does he evaluate these
are being favourable?

Is homosexuality a learned
behaviour?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church [No. 2358] says
that people with same-sex attractions do not choose their homosexual condition.
From your point of view, does that mean that it is not a learned behaviour?

This is an astute question. Up to now,
Fr Harvey has been implying that 'same sex
attractions' are learned, even when they doesn't
become behaviour.

One of the ways that homosexual activity
is 'learned' is when a person is introduced to that form of activity by
another person. There are other ways that one may learn homosexual activity,
such as through the things that they watch or read. However, the homosexual
condition itself generally develops involuntarily.

So is it involuntary 'learned'
from external influences or does it develop from potentiality found in
the make up of the human individual, in a similar manner to which 'opposite
sex attractions' develop.

I don't believe that anyone chooses to have same-sex
attractions. The homosexual condition has emotional roots and is influenced
by attitudes in the mind that come about because of various external events.

So according to Fr Harvey 'same
sex attractions' are learned, but involuntarily.
I presume that he therefore believes that every human being is 'essentially
heterosexual' and those who are 'functionally homosexual' have been perverted
from their natural character.

However, it is not a real choice because that person
usually didn't have control over the circumstances and traumas that influenced
the development of same-sex attractions. Real choice involves full knowledge
and advertence in the mind and freedom in the will.

"But, it's not their fault."

The evidence leans heavily on the fact that same-sex
attractions are due largely to environmental causes. There's no evidence
of inborn homosexuality: it doesn't exist.

Oh yes it does! No-one claims that anyone
is pre-programmed from conception to being gay: any more than they are
pre-programmed to being straight. Many genetic effects take the form of
predispositions that interact with environmental factors in complex ways
in order to produce definite - and possibly immutable - outcomes.

There is a hundred years of evidence that same-sex
attractions are related to environmental factors and psychological influences.
All the evidence before 1973 pointed to environmental factors.

Rules for sex

In 1960, Karol Wojtyla (who was elected Pope John
Paul II in 1978), argued that, “although it
is easy to draw up a set of rules for Catholics in the sector of ‘sexual’
morality the need to validate these rules makes itself felt at every step.
For the rules often run up against greater difficulties in practice than
in theory, and the spiritual advisor, who is concerned above all with the
practical, must seek ways of justifying them. For his task is not only
to command or forbid, but to justify, to interpret, to explain.”

Note Karol Wojtyla's confusion of "validation"
with rationalization or post-hoc justification. He continued this confusion
in his pontificate. The reason that Wojtyla's "rules
often run up against greater difficulties in practice than in theory"
is, of course, because they are just as erroneous as were Ptolomy's rules
about astronomy.

Eros

In our culture, love has come to be identified
with eros (sexual desire), a word which does not appear in the New
Testament.

When Christ and the Apostles speak of love, they
usually speak of agape (self-sacrificing love) or less frequently
of philia (friendship).

Which Jesus tells us is the greatest
form of love.

The Apostle Paul writes, “Every
other sin which a man commits is outside the body; but the sexually immoral
man sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is
a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are
not your own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body”
[I
Corinthians 6:18-20].

We do not need to pretend that chastity is easy,
for in our fallen human state, the purity of heart demanded by Christ is
impossible: as impossible as the virgin birth. But what is impossible by
human effort is possible for God. It is by relying on God's grace that
we gain the strength to “gradually and resolutely
approach Christian perfection” [CCC #2359].

Is "purity of heart" the same thing as
"chastity"? Is it only - or even predominantly - to be understood in terms
of sexual mores?

But sexual sin is the grave matter of mortal sin
precisely because it defiles the"temple of
the Holy Spirit within" us.

How? What does this mean? St. Paul actually
says that sexual congress with a prostitute physically unites a member
of Christ with a whore and so is unseemly.

Marriage is a profound mystery

It is also grave because, as the Apostle Paul tells
the Ephesians, the sexual union of a man and a woman in marriage is a
“profound mystery” which points us to the
union of Christ and the Church [Eph 5:32].
This is the reason that throughout Scripture, idolatry is likened to adultery,
and vice-versa.

Note that "sexual sin" is implicitly
and incoherently equated with adultery, whether a break in trust is present
or not. The notion is that it is the sexual act that is grave matter rather
than the psychological infidelity.

The book of Genesis reveals three basic elements
of God's plan for human sexual love. First, complementarity:
“God
created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male
and female He created them”[Gen 1:27];
second, procreation: “God
blessed them, and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the
earth’”[Gen 1:27];
and third, union: “therefore
a man shall leave his father and his mother and cleave to his wife, and
they shall become one flesh”[Genesis 2:24].

Jesus Himself points back to Genesis and says
that
marriage is
no mere human contract: it is God who joins the man and woman together,
and“what God has joined together, let not
man put asunder”[Matthew 19:6].
But God's plan for human sexuality has been marred by human sin, which
has hardened our hearts to love. Instead of loving
each other without
counting the cost, lust constantly tempts us to use each other.

This is a sad view of human sexuality!
It seems to me that romanto-erotic love should be neither "self sacrifice"
nor "mutual exploitation" but rather "joyful sharing".

Sin always exchanges God's truth for a lie. I saw
this powerfully illustrated in a public debate a few years ago. One of
the debaters defended the Catholic sexual ethic; the other argued for what
he called a more “compassionate” stance. Christians live under grace, not
under the law, he argued. He agreed that the “letter” of Matthew Chapter
Nineteen forbade divorce, but argued that to follow the letter of Christ's
teaching is legalistic.

A mistake
had already been made at this point. The Roman Church does not disallow
divorce: but only remarriage after divorce.

The Catholic stood by Christ's teaching on divorce,
and said that it should still apply to Christians today. At this point,
things got a little heated, and the advocate of “compassion” ended up calling
the Catholic a Pharisee, saying that his stance was not Christ-like. The
Catholic defended the logic of his position fairly well, but I think that
in the minds of most of his audience, the charge that he was a Pharisee
promoting legalism stuck, because he did not identify the real problem
with his opponent's argument.

The real difficulty, which I did not see until
later, was that it was the Pharisees who believed in divorce, and
Jesus
who forbade divorce and remarriage.

Jesus stood up for the integrity of human relationships:
for honesty and faithfulness. Those who seek to impose arbitrary rules
on others, especially those that are directly at odds with their deepest
characteristics certainly have mistaken human traditions for the Divine
Gospel of abundant living!

In short, this man had set up a standard of “Christ-likeness”
according to which the words of Christ Himself were “un-Christ-like.” Even
more troubling, the position which he said was based on “grace” and not
on “law” was in fact exactly the position that the Pharisees advocated,
and which Jesus rejected. The more I thought about it, the more I realized
that in order to justify divorce, he had invented a Jesus very different
from the One whom the Apostles preached, the martyrs died for, the Fathers
expounded, and the Church worships. In place of Christ revealed in the
Scriptures, he had embraced a phantom: phantom who agreed with the
Pharisees more than with the Word made flesh, but who agreed with his own
culture and desires more than anything else.

In fact, this clever debating point is
wrong.

There is no question that the Church's proposition
to the same-sex attracted person is costly. But it is still very much grace.
According to the Catholic Church, “As in every
moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfilment and
happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church,
in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit
but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically
understood.”

A personal testimony

Here's what usually happens. A Catholic begins to
recognize that he is struggling with same-sex attraction, so he opens up
the Catechism, looks for homosexuality in the index, turns to paragraph
2357, reads the phrase, “intrinsically disordered”,
and freaks out. “The Church is saying that I'm mentally ill!” he says.
“Why is the Church so down on me?”

An accurate and well judged evaluation.

Part of the problem is that few Catholics know enough
about what the Catechism says about human sexuality and the disorder due
to sin to be able to place those words in context. When the Church speaks
of human sexuality, She has in mind the order God created in the beginning,
and when She speaks of disordered acts or desires, She means anything
which in some way contradicts that order.

This is why the Apostle Paul says that those who
reject the command against homosexual acts “worshiped
and served the creature rather than the Creator”
[Rom 1:24-27].

An interesting and rather convenient
reversal
of
what St Paul actually says!

Since "God's power and
deity" are revealed by His creation, the Apostle
Paul says that the human race is

“without excuse; for although they knew
God they did not honour Him as God or give thanks to him, but they became
futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming
to be wise, they became fools”[Rom 1:20-22].

But when we turn back to the creation account in
Genesis, what is one of the most obvious truths present in the creation?
That God created human beings male and female.

It should be obvious to all that
arguments - still more insinuations - from the obvious are unwise.

The Apostle Paul continues:

“When Gentiles who do not have the law
do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even
though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is
written on their hearts”[Rom. 2:14-15].

The Church's teaching was very difficult for me to
embrace; but I knew that to justify a gay relationship to myself, I would
have to blind myself to a truth that was written on my own heart, however
much I did not like to find it written there.

But what exactly was this truth
and did the author correctly discern it, or was his conscience malformed
by listening to irrational homophobic teaching for too long? The experience
and judgement that the author of this speech testifies to is by no means
universal among gay Catholics - not even those of a more traditionalist
bent!

When the Catholic Church calls homosexual acts disordered,
She echoes the logic of the Apostle Paul, who points us to the order
which God has inscribed in His creation, in the male and female symmetry
our bodies, and in our hearts.

But not - of his own testimony - in Ron's
heart!

But She calls homosexual acts disordered,
as she calls many other acts disordered, because She calls homosexual persons,
like everyone else, to “gradually and resolutely
approach Christian perfection.”

But there is no significant expectation
or experience that "homosexual persons"
will
become "heterosexual persons".

Christ said that a house divided against itself cannot
stand, and simply to recognize God's law, even if I fail completely to
obey it, divides the deadly sins against themselves within my heart. Because
as soon as I admit that chastity is good, every sexual sin strikes a blow
at my pride, my delusion of my own righteousness. Even if I make no
progress
in chastity, the repeated acknowledgement of my failure, leads to an ever
deepening humility, and the recognition that my salvation can only come
from God.

This conflict came to a head in my late teens. My
closest friend and I had a close bond due to our shared interest in flying
and our shared Christian faith. As time went on, my feelings for him became
more and more romantic. I fought this, both because my friend was strongly
opposed to homosexuality, and because I believed that it was against God's
law. But then I began to suspect that he, too, probably had a crush on
me. Hugs turned into occasional hand holding, and hand holding led to cuddling.
I remember once watching
Out of Africa snuggled up on the couch,
with my head resting against his chest, listening to his heart and dreaming
about one day going to Africa with him and flying around seeing all the
beautiful scenery from the movie.

This naturally set up an intense internal conflict
within me, and I believe within him, as well, although we never discussed
it, because discussing it would have meant admitting that our feelings
for each other had something to do with homosexuality. I had long conversations
with God about this, attempting to explain to Him that all my happiness
was tied up in making this relationship work out and that He just had
to see things my way.

This is the point at which this touching
story starts to go wrong. It is never true that all ones happiness is tied
up in any one human relationship, though I know only too well how it can
feel this way!

I spent lots of time trying to figure out arguments
for why maybe the Bible didn't mean what folks said it meant.

Again, this is not the correct attitude.
Seeking to understand the testimony of Scripture and Tradition is
not the same as seeking to twist it to predetermined ends. The Magisterium
is culpable of the latter error in the matter of "love sex and friendship".

But God more or less made it clear to me that friendship
was good and healthy, but anything more was verboten.

How? Also, the "more or less" is a fascinating
qualification. I suspect that much lies hidden behind this comment!

And in any case, this complicated combination of
guilt and fear of God and each other kept us from anything beyond the sort
of innocent affection described above.

What a very unhealthy "Catholic" combination:
"guilt and fear of God and each other"!

Looking back, I see that the good that came from
that relationship was due to our friendship; the romantic tension only
introduced emotional drama which got in the way of the friendship and gave
us a lot of baggage.

This reads like a wholesale disvaluation
of romance. Would the situation have been different if Ron's friend had
been female? If so, why?

But at the time, I often thought God was a spoilsport,
standing in the way of my only shot at happiness.

Today, one of my closest friends is another same-sex
attracted Christian. I have not kept track of hours, but I believe I can
truthfully claim to have spent more hours praying for him than we have
spent communicating with each other. When we do spend time together, we
are very respectful of each other's boundaries, not because we are cold
or rigid or uncaring, but because we care too deeply for God and for each
other to mess up the
agape
and
philia that we share by giving
room for eros to push its way in and corrupt love with lust.

Again, this reads as if eros is always
a villain. Is eros evil per se? Does eros have a role within marriage?
If not then why is there not room for "the kind of love that does have
a role within marriage" between two persons of the same gender?

True friendship is based on my desire for my friend's
good, not on what I hope to obtain from my friend. True friendship involves
choosing
to do what is best for my friend, not seeking to fulfil my own wants and
desires. Above all, true friends will draw each other into the Good News
of Jesus Christ.

Indeed and so serve each others greatest
good. Marriage, the
Church teaches, is a species of friendship, and has exactly this process
of mutual sanctification as one of its goals. So why cannot two persons
of the same gender be married?

"Adjustment disorder", that would be the likely diagnosis, the receptionist
at Family Legacy Christian Counselling in Johnston tells the young woman.
We have three counsellors who could meet with you to help you deal with
your same-sex attractions, the secretary assures her; counsellors who have
been helping people with these issues for more than fifteen years. The
first available appointment would be June seventeenth and it's $100 per
session. Of course, if you have Wellmark or United, you could probably
get it covered by insurance.

According to the greater clinical community, however, the "problem"
for which the young woman seeks help is not considered a cause for counselling
at all. In 1973 the characterization of homosexuality as a disease was
abolished by professional organizations like the American Psychological
Association and the American Psychiatry Association. But, for some, institutional
reference texts like the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM) pale in comparison to sacred books like the Bible.

While offering conversion or "reparative" therapy for homosexuals became
professionally taboo three decades ago, a religious movement rose up to
fill the secular vacuum for those "struggling" with same-sex attractions.
In 1976, Exodus International, the largest ministry dedicated to the conversion
of homosexuals, was established in California. Now, nearly thirty years
after its inception, Exodus received 400,000 requests at its member offices
last year, says spokesperson Julie Neils, which is a dramatic increase
from 160,000 in just 2002. In the past two years, the organization has
also added fourteen new ministries, growing their ex-gay activities to
129 locations (including Coralville and Quad Cities), she adds.

And Exodus isn't the only religious front in what has become a national
ex-gay movement. There's Courage for Catholics and Jews Offering New Alternatives
to Homosexuality. There's One to One for Presbyterians, Evergreen for Mormons
and Transforming Congregations for Methodists. Over the past decade, the
movement has also grown to include purportedly secular groups, like Parents
and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), which advocate for "equal access"
for the ex-gay message. It's expanded to include a "psychoanalytic, educational
association," the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality,
which professes to document the science behind sexual reorientation, albeit
mixing academics and religious leaders on its board of directors.

But while ex-gay groups say science is emerging that backs the legitimacy
of sexual conversion, their views remain markedly outside the scientific
mainstream. Since the 1973 removal of homosexuality from the DSM, the overwhelming
majority of professional associations, from the American Psychoanalytic
Association to the American Academy of Pediatrics, have
penned strong position statements emphasizing that "reparative" therapies
lack scientific basis and risk psychological trauma. The American Psychiatry
Association scolds such conversion practitioners for "openly integrat[ing]
older psychoanalytic theories that pathologize homosexuality with traditional
religious beliefs," and Rhea Farberman, spokesperson for the
American Psychological Association, says her organization also has
grave concerns about claims of homosexual cures.

"The APA has raised red flags," Farberman explains.

"We're concerned that there's no good science that they
work,

that it's based on discriminatory views that fly in the face of the mental
health community that, for more than thirty years, has said that homosexuality
is not an illness, that it's not something that needs to be cured. Our
concern is that we haven't seen any strong evidence that it helps people,
but a lot of concern that it could hurt people."

Chad Thompson

The day before he blew out ten candles on his birthday cake, Chad Thompson
came to the terrifying realization that he was going to burn for all eternity.
He remembers the scene as idyllic - a soft breeze gliding through his open
window, the reassuring sounds of his mother making cupcakes downstairs,
the childlike excitement of a next day birthday celebration. But laying
in bed that night even the comforting sounds of baking pans clattering
onto kitchen counters couldn't penetrate a sudden, deafening silence. For
some time, Thompson's mind offered a steady reassurance: "I'm not gay,
I'm not gay, I'm not gay." But that night in fourth grade the mantra stopped.
His internal campaign to convince himself that his same-sex attractions
were all a big mistake suddenly went silent. He was gay. And he was terrified.

Growing up in a religious household headed by a Christian filmmaker,
the Des Moines native knew homosexuality was an unconscionable sin before
he even knew what those seven deadly syllables meant. He remembers laughing
naively at jokes his cousins cracked at the boathouse about such sexual
deviants. He recalls the menacing predictions for such sinners at his Baptist
church; the pastor intoning that "no homosexual shall enter the kingdom
of God." Then he realized he was attracted to other boys and those confidence
crushing jokes and dire pronouncements of damnation were directed squarely
at him. And while his body told him he wanted sex from men, his mind told
him he wanted to rid himself of such inclinations. The confusion and helplessness,
he explains, felt like a tornado in his soul.

"There was the voice of society trying to tell me, 'You're gay, you
should embrace it,'" he says. "Some voices were saying, 'You're a fag,
you should die.' Some voices told me, 'You'll never know who you are.'
But there was another voice. That was the voice of my creator, and he was
telling me who I was, who he created me to be. I listened to that, and
that's where I am
today." Today, a dozen years after he unwrapped his unwelcome sexuality
the night before his birthday, Thompson professes to have struggled through
and "overcome" his homosexuality. Openly discussing his sexual evolution
between sips of Starbucks coffee and brief checks of his cell phone, the
twenty-six year-old has a breezy confidence in his unexpected role as a
sought after speaker in the evangelical world. Last year, he caught a cold,
spent ten days jotting down his thoughts about the church's treatment of
homosexuals and his Jesus led sexual liberation, and now, six months after
his book's publication, he's so in demand that he quit his job.

While hundreds of local residents gathered last weekend for Gay Pride
events, Thompson has become a self-appointed advocate of "ex-gay" pride.
To his evangelical peers he's the poster child for Christian claims that
"change is possible." But to secular society and the LGBT community the
curly haired kid in a Gap shirt and DC shoes is a dangerous slap in the
face to sexual parity, an anomaly within the body of accepted science and
a representative of a religious movement that, even Thompson acknowledges,
has a "sordid history."

Chad Thompson is pretty sure he could have had sex with other guys in
high school. Lord knows, the attraction to the male physique was difficult
to stifle. He never came out as gay, he says, but everyone knew. His only
friends were girls. He had "very distinct crushes on specific people in
school," and, despite critics' attempts to label him bisexual, he knows
for a fact he was interested in only one gender. "I had exclusively homosexual
attractions until I decided to pursue change," he says. "I was not attracted
to women in high school. I was repulsed by women."

But he was also repulsed by the fact that his infatuations were not
in line with his faith, and never actually indulged in intimacy with someone
of the same sex. He knew "homosexuality was not God's best in me," but,
for years, didn't know where to turn to have his "unwanted" attractions
straightened out. Church wasn't an option - religion had already condemned
him. And telling his parents was so out of the question he couldn't even
bring himself to buy books about the subject for fear of being discovered.

Instead, his first inspiration came in the form of an Oprah Winfrey
show about the ex-gay movement. The audience was sceptical. Thompson was
sceptical, too. But, emboldened by the possibility, he stole a book - "Desires
in Conflict" by evangelical author Joe Dallas - from the Christian radio
station where he worked and began investigating the spiritual and
psychological prospects for transformation. Already in counselling
for depression, his therapist gave credence to the possibility, and from
there a higher power took hold.

"It was the Holy Spirit that led me supernaturally through a psychotherapeutic
process," Thompson says. "I got on my knees before God many times, saying
'I want to be in your will; I want to do what you want me to do,' and He
put relationships and experiences in my life that reconditioned my way
of thinking."

In reading widely, he came to believe that his unwanted attractions
were the product of tangible psychological deficiencies in his childhood.
Drawing on a select group of scientists - most notably Joseph
Nicolosi, a California psychologist affiliated with the pro-conversion
National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality - Thompson
came to believe that divine
intervention could help repair an emotionally compromised past.

Like his relationship with his father, who he describes as physically
present but emotionally distant. Instead of bonding with his same-sex parent
growing up, he says he identified with his mother and thus failed to affirm
his masculine identity. He also remembers being ordered out of the room
whenever a male undressed, leaving him feeling "disenfranchised" from his
own body. Such conditioning, he says, made the physical and behavioural
characteristics of masculinity an enticing mystery.

"What's exotic becomes erotic," he says. "One of the reasons I was physically
aroused by the male physique was that I had never been in a normal, natural
situation where guys didn't have their clothes on. There was a mystery
that shouldn't have been. I didn't have any solid friendships with males,
so it was almost like masculinity was a secret I wasn't allowed to know
and that's what became attractive to me sexually."

So Thompson became convinced that if he could correct the core psychological
failings he could redirect his attractions. That's where Lenny came in.
An ex-gay man in Seattle, Lenny's self-reported transformation - from a
practising homosexual for 26 years to a married man with the classic picket-fence
life - inspired Thompson. So when Lenny invited him for lunch halfway across
the country, Thompson hopped a flight to the West Coast. "He gave me a
very warm, solid, lengthy embrace, which was something I had longed for,"
he says of their meeting. "It was indicative of the emotional need driving
my homosexual attraction. Behind every homoerotic desire is an emotional
need, and during puberty, emotional need turns sexual. I was able to meet
that emotional need, and there was nothing sexual about it. I mean, he
was forty-eight and I was nineteen!"

Thus began Thompson's self-described second puberty. Accepting hugs
and hand holding from other males, he says, met his need for tangible affirmation
and non sexual touch from members of the same sex. He cultivated friendships
with other guys - guys who don't "struggle" like he does. "That's what
I needed," he says. "It's almost like they taught me about heterosexuality.
I don't want to imply that gay people have a completely different way of
doing everything, but there's a way that straight people relate to each
other that, in some ways, is different than the way they'd relate if they
were gay."

And the more he became one of the guys, he says, the less alluring and
more mundane masculinity became. The mystery began to wane, he says, and
the prospect of being intimate with a same-sex partner made him think,
"what would I want to do that for?" One notable a-ha moment came two summers
ago at a Christian camp in Estes Park, where he befriended a group of guys
with whom he became extremely close, but even the four of them packed giddily
into a three person tent didn't produce a single sexual inclination. Quite
the contrary.

"All I could think about was this girl, a particular girl," he says
of that summer. "She didn't like me, but I was experiencing things towards
her that I didn't think I would ever feel toward a girl. She was all I
thought about, just like guys who don't struggle [with homosexuality].
I wanted to hang out with her instead of the guys - and these were very
attractive guys. But all I could think about was that girl, and that's
happened more than once."

He acknowledges that his attraction to women now is still not as strong
as it was to men when he was in high school, but he has had girlfriends.
Although he's single at the moment, he has aspirations of marriage, and,
although he's still "struggling," he says he has no fear of feeling again
like he did that night before his tenth birthday.

"I'm not suppressing homosexual desires; I'm being transformed," he
says. "That's important. It's not about seeing a guy and thinking, 'I'm
going to discipline myself to think differently about him.' That's how
it is at first, but you find the core issues driving your attractions and
deal with those issues, and those attractions will disappear."

And Thompson doesn't think he's unique. Whether devout or doubtful,
he thinks anyone can follow in his footsteps.

"I believe every person has a latent heterosexuality that they can build
on if they want to," he says. "But it's been a process. I had conditioned
myself for twenty-one years to think a certain way about men before I started
to change. You don't overcome twenty-one years in five minutes. But
my relationship with Jesus was leading me through a psychotherapeutic process,
and who knows the brain better than the one who created it?"

Ex Ex Gays

Ed Fouts, of Capitol City Pride, says his best friend sought help from
an ex-gay ministry, but it didn't work. Rich Eychaner, a leader in the
local LGBT community, says he gets plenty of calls from local residents
who've spent decades suffering in silence, like a Catholic gentleman who
recently contacted him after more than fifteen years of trying to will
himself straight.

"It's like a diet drug," Eychaner says of the ex-gay concept. "You take
a pill, eat all you want and never gain weight. It's terrible dealing with
society's sanctions against gay people, so some think 'Hey, I don't have
to be the victim anymore.' It sounds very appealing on the surface, but
it's like these diet cures. It doesn't work."

In fact, advocates point out,

a striking number of ex-gay leaders have themselves returned
to same-sex partnerships after their professed transformation. Most notably, the two male founders of Exodus International divorced themselves from the movement three years after its establishment and had a marriage ceremony to each other in 1982.

Jennifer Harvey, assistant professor of Religion and Ethics at Drake University,
says that's not the only chink in the ex-gay movement's armour. "I can
just speak anecdotally, but there are repeated stories of ex-gay leaders
cruising gay bars, incredibly high suicide rates among those who go through
these kinds of programs, and also increasing numbers - still small and
under the radar - of Christian communities that are refusing to say being
lesbian and gay is inherently sinful," she says.

A lesbian and ordained minister herself, Harvey says she's reluctant
to "stampede on someone else's experience," but, for the most part, the
ex-gay movement is dubious theology, not a benevolent science. "What really
frightens me is they prey on young gay and lesbian people" she says. "In
this society, to become aware that you're gay or lesbian, for almost anyone,
is a terrifying experience. Gays and lesbians are not well loved and well
embraced, and these groups prey on struggling, younger people who haven't
found affirmation or acceptance, who are led to believe they can find a
way out of something there's not a way out of. Those who get caught in
groups like those are only being even further enculturated in hating selves."

Sandy

Sandy buried herself so deep in deception, that, after years of self-imposed
repression, she came to feel that life itself held no meaning. Intent to
please her family and her conception of God, the area resident convinced
herself that the girlfriend she'd had such a crush on in high school meant
nothing. She swallowed her same-sex attractions and, at age twenty-one,
got married to "a really sweet guy." Even after she came out to herself,
she made a vow to uphold her wedding covenant and never let others know
that she was homosexual. But abiding by Christian ideals to avoid eternal
damnation proved counter-productive: she had already condemned herself
to a living hell. "I finally reached my breaking point and came out to
him and my family," she says. "It was the most difficult thing I've ever
done because I loved him and I enjoyed spending time with him. If anyone
could have 'changed' my orientation, it would have been him. It would have
been much easier to stay in that marriage, to have a comfortable life,
to be accepted in my church unquestionably, to let everyone in both of
our families believe that life was happy and complete for both of us. But
it wasn't complete for me. It wasn't true."

For many in the LGBT community, such stories of years sacrificed to
deception and repression are not uncommon. Many note that,

while sexuality may be fluid: implying that those on one side of the spectrum are able to change; while those on the other side are the infallible design of God, is not only demeaning, it's downright false!

"Those of us who fall more squarely on one end of the continuum or the
other can not change our affectional orientation just by trying or by praying
about it," Sandy says. "I prayed for years. The message I got from God
was to stop hiding and live an authentic life, even though that was the
more difficult path." Sandy can hardly imagine the damage an organized
effort could have on someone struggling to accept their own identity. "The
amount of self loathing one must feel to hate who you are is mind boggling,"
she says.

"And it's a terrible sin for these 'ministries' to so injure
a person by making them hate who they are. These 'ministries' are no different from any other hate group -they use fear and self loathing to advance their agenda."

Bridget Night

Even before her son's first experience with oral sex landed him in the
hospital with a swollen throat and the worst case of gonorrhoea the county
health department had ever seen, Bridget Night was "freaking out." The
Quad Cities mom (who uses the pseudonym Bridget Night for her work in the
ex-gay movement) just thought her son needed to work through some "social
problems" when they sent him to a mental health counsellor as a teen. It
wasn't until he was sixteen years old that they discovered his e-mail correspondences
with a gay twenty year-old in Denmark who was helping their son understand
his sexual orientation.

"Of course, we're freaking out," Night recalls. "We're a Christian family
that believes in the Bible and we just didn't understand the issue at all
basically. I'd been a hairdresser for thirty years and worked with a lot
of homosexuals, but I never thought about it too much." But when her son's
sexual orientation conflicted with their religious convictions, she remembered
seeing a spot on the 700 Club that gave her hope; a segment about Exodus
International. Still terrified, she went to an Exodus support group in
Coralville, where she would sing, pray, share her trials with other concerned
parents and "have a lesson from the manual on educating people to know
where same sex attraction comes from."

Now she's the leader of one of two Iowa chapters of Parents and Friends
of Ex-Gays and Gays, which has grown to more than thirty cities since its
inception in 1999. The purpose of the group, she says, is not to advocate
for gay conversion necessarily, but to let "strugglers" know that help
is available and, as a recent billboard campaign professed, "Ex-Gays Prove
That Change is Possible."

Currently, Night has eight members in her Quad Cities chapter, which
she keeps listed under "mental health" in the local phone book, albeit
with a special number that is not her home line. She holds monthly educational
meetings, and has sent Exodus and Evergreen pamphlets to the local LGBT
centre, literature to every local junior high and high school principal
and flyers to area hospitals. And, of course, she's encouraged her son
to attend ex-gay conferences and meetings. "We're not anti-gay," she says
of PFOX. "Anyone who wants to be gay, that's fine. But for many Christian
families and young people it's unwanted."

Still, to many, that's circular logic.

What pushes someone to seek conversion in the first placeis often the stated or subtle condemnation from both the religious and secular community.

As Sandy points out: "The attraction is only unwanted because someone told
them they could only be attracted to opposites." And the presence of organizations
like PFOX peddling the possibility of conversion only further heaps guilt
and condemnation on those who would otherwise be content with their identity,
Eychaner says, essentially "projecting expectations on people that they
can't meet and putting the power of God behind it."

In fact, even Night acknowledges that

despite her stated desire that he seek change, her son has chosen to embrace "the gay lifestyle" instead.

She emphasizes she will love him either way and she's met with area churches
to scale back the negative stigma and "freakish" stereotypes many Christians
project on those with same-sex attractions.

But, even more than "unconditional love," PFOX's buzz phrase is "equal
access." Just last month, a federal judge ruled in favour of PFOX in a
Maryland lawsuit, issuing a restraining order against a local school board
because its health curriculum only considers "the moral rightness of homosexuality"
and does not include information on the prospect of change. Thompson thinks
groups like PFOX have the right idea in giving students both sides of the
story and recently created his own organization - Inqueery - to address
alleged school bias. In that effort, he's created prototype literature
that, he believes, could provide balance to the gay/straight alliance organizations
that, "sometimes encourage kids to identify as gay, or, at the very least,
are not educating them that change is possible."

Although supporters highlight a small handful of published studies about
successful sexual conversions - most notably a 2001 study by Robert Spitzer,
who figured prominently in the 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from
the DSM - to claim their argument is backed by science and can be presented
without the mention of religion, Harvey says there's "essentially no
argument that doesn't boil down to religion" and thus "equal access"
could be considered a blurring of the line between church and state.

Sarah Graham

Sara Graham, president of Drake University's Rainbow Union last year, says
she too is an advocate of the free flow of ideas, but, in the case of ex-gay
access, such questionable information could hinder the emotional development
of LGBT students. "It confuses not only gay kids who grew up very religious
and are very unsure of coming out even though they can't deny their homosexuality
any longer to themselves, but it hurts their families and friends, too,
making it seem like their friend or child is purposely doing something
hurtful," Graham says.

"I worry about people who grow up learning that sexuality
can be changed - one way, but, of course, not the other - because they could end up scared, hurt, confused, or even a bigot towards themselves and others."

A man with a megaphone tried his Bible beating best to undermine Sara Graham
and Emily Renaud's wedding day. Last year, the then Drake students flew
to San Francisco, becoming one of the first couples to tie the knot when
thousands of same sex couples travelled from across the country to have
their unions finally recognized by the state. But, even outside the secular
courthouse, Graham and Renaud were bombarded with the preaching of overzealous
religious activists.

"There was an 'ex-gay' there with a bullhorn, talking about how many
men he'd slept with and other lewd things, and talking about how Jesus
helped him to be straight and all that jazz," Graham recalls. "And they
kept telling us how bad we were for our children, and there were plenty
of people in line with kids, and this guy's talking about oral sex. I just
thought that he was doing exactly what he was accusing us of."

Thompson says he sympathizes. He knows his "ex-gay" message has to haul
the baggage of a Christian tradition that, he says, has a well deserved
bad rap. For two years he worked for the Iowa Family Policy Centre but
ultimately left because the repent-or-perish politics of the radical right
concerned him. He's careful to point out that those folks remain his close
friends,
but, just like Christians often describe their stance on homosexuality
as "love the sinner, hate the sin," Thompson's take on the conservative
movement could be described as "love the people, hate the politics."

He acknowledges that there is still a tremendous amount of entrenched
hostility and hollow stereotypes harboured by both the gay and ex-gay community
and, when it comes to conversation "intellect often takes a back seat."
He thinks there needs to be more dialogue and less debate. But although
he says he's been able to convert wary LGBT student groups, like the one
last month in Wisconsin, from snickering at him at the start of his speech
to engaging in mutually respecting conversation over lunch, he clearly
harbours views that are hard for those in the LGBT community to swallow.

"I believe that heterosexuality is God's design," he says. "I know that's
controversial and it gets me in a lot of trouble, but I think gay and lesbian
people need to be able to know what my religious convictions are without
insisting that I'm a homophobe or bigot. I don't make those assumptions
about them;

I don't think they're any less in God's eyes because they
embrace their homosexuality."

But even with his professions of acceptance, many can't help but bristle
at claims of sexual reorientation.

"Most straights are horrified to think they could be taught
to be gay," Sandy says. "But somehow it's okay for them to expect us to change who we are.
It's crazy."

Appendix VII: Based on an article from "PlanetOut News" July 29, 2005
by Peterson Toscano

Since I was a teenager, I made several stops along the "ex-gay" Underground
Railroad, where I attended Exodus "ex-gay" support groups and dozens of
Christian ministries. I met for intimate counseling sessions with pastors
and Christian therapists. I endured three exorcisms and finally subjected
myself to two years at the LIA "Homo No Mo" rehab. Just as I did with those
sweet potatoes and grapefruits, I imposed this "ex-gay" torture on myself.
Fuelled with homophobia and self-loathing, I did a number on myself that
nearly destroyed me. In total, I spent 17 years and over $30,000 in pursuit
of the hetero impossible dream. Many adults have done what I did. What's
worse is that ex-gay recruitment efforts are now targeting youth more often.

A few weeks ago, a 16-year-old named Zach alerted friends through his
blog that instead of going away to, say, a band camp or soccer camp or
any normal camp, his parents had enrolled him in LIA's teen reprogramming
"ex-gay" boot camp. In a burst of righteous indignation, Zach's friends
and many other Memphis area teens rose up in protest. Each day, in the
insufferable Mississippi Delta heat, they stood as witnesses to the persecution
of Zach and many other queer teens - all done in Jesus' name. Without any
prompting from the adult queer community, these young people - queer and
straight - publicized Zach's story through blogs, protest signs and now
media coverage. Like the rioters at Stonewall, which occurred at around
the same time of year back in 1969, these Memphis young people have alerted
America and the world to the madness around them - in this case the madness
of forced conversions.

For years the Religious Right has slandered our community, accusing
us of orchestrating a gay agenda that targets America's youth. They have
claimed that we recruit and convert young people. They have been wrong
about this for years. As if our community were that organized and in agreement
about anything. Many of us queer folks find that it's hard enough to de-tox
from a weekend of cheese fries and cosmos, let alone survive an elaborate
process of de-homosexualization.

But now look at who, with evangelical zeal, is targeting young people,
and then is attempting to recruit and convert them. With
the fundamentalist world view of saving a lost and dying world, "ex-gay"
groups have taken upon themselves the mission to transform queer and questioning
youth into their own image. Talk about hypocrites. In spite of the mountain
of evidence by the American Psychiatric Association and every major medical
organization in the world, they engage in unethical practices to make gay
kids straight.

In the words of Susan Powter, the great transformer herself, "Stop the
insanity!" Let the captives free! And if some misguided,
well-meaning, insane queer adult wants to reform himself into a shadow
of a heterosexual - fine, so be it, but let's leave the kids out of this.

Peterson Toscano, an "ex-gay survivor and theatrical performance activist,
shares his story throughout the United States in his
one-man comedy, "Doin' Time in the Homo No Mo Halfway House."

Appendix VIII: The Pseudo-Psychology Behind Homosexual Tendencies

A much abbreviated interview with Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a contributor
to the Catholic Medical Association's document "Homosexuality and Hope."

How would you distinguish between someone with
same-sex attractions and someone with deep-seated homosexual tendencies?

Those with deep-seated homosexual tendencies
identify themselves as homosexual persons and are usually unwilling to
examine their emotional conflicts that caused this tendency. Strong physical
attraction is present to other men's bodies and to the masculinity of others
due to profound weakness in male confidence. These individuals in the priesthood
have a significant affective immaturity with excessive anger and jealousy
toward males who are not homosexual, insecurity that leads them to avoid
close friendships with such males and an inordinate need for attention.

This is simply insulting as a description
of what it is to be gay and the explanation is even more insulting. There
is, I suspect no experimental evidence to corroborate any of this.I do not hate are feel anger or jealousy towards
heterosexual males. I have quite a few close friends who are heterosexual
males!

Most of these men had painful adolescent experiences
of significant loneliness and sadness, felt insecure in their masculinity,
and had a poor body image. Well designed research studies have demonstrated
a much higher prevalence of psychiatric illness in those who identify themselves
as homosexual.

What is cause and what is effect? The
stress of living in homophobic society and Church are large contributors
to "loneliness and insecurity" and might easily lead to psychiatric illness.
Of course, Dr Fitzgibbons believes that homosexuality is itself a psychiatric
illness!

Under severe stress they may even experience strong
physical and sexual attraction to adolescent males, as has occurred in
the crisis in the Church. Frequently, they may have difficulty working
in a collegial and comfortable way with heterosexual males.

Note the word "frequently". This is arrant
rubbish. I have no such difficulty, neither do any of the gay friends that
I have who work in secular organizations. This is utter piffle!

Unresolved paternal anger is regularly misdirected
as rebellion against the magisterium and the Church's teaching on sexual
morality. Unfortunately, their denial, defensiveness and anger block their
openness to seek the Lord's help with their emotional and behavioural weaknesses.

This kind of clap-trap cannot be disproved.
It attempts to dismiss any person who disagrees with the speaker as being
incapable of having a valid view-point. It is not worthy of answer.

Those with mild homosexual tendencies do not identify
themselves as homosexuals. Such men are motivated to understand and to
overcome their emotional conflicts. They regularly seek psychotherapy and
spiritual direction. The goal of counselling is to uncover early conflicts,
forgive those who hurt them and increase their male confidence - which
in time may lead to the resolution of same-sex attractions. Such men accept
and want to live and teach the fullness of the Church's teaching on sexual
morality. They do not support the homosexual culture but see it as antithetical
to the universal call to holiness.

Such men are pretty messed-up and generally
in a state of denial! I suppose that to an extent this paragraph describes
me before I went to Bristol University; except that I never
perceived myself to be suffering from the aftermath of emotional conflicts
or to be in need of forgiving any-one for hurting me!

The paragraph does sound like a pretty thorough
description of at least one person I know. I sincerely hope that it isn't:

He has had quasi-gay experiences.

He doesn't identify as being gay.

He accepts and wants "to
live the fullness of the Church's teaching on sexual morality".

He has received lots of counselling from a priest-psychologist.

He has been told that he has relationship issues
that go back to before he was born.